Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
You are confusing the two issues. There is one issue of whether or not you did the crime. If you did the crime and you are sitting in jail what is the problem.
There other issue is the illegal search. You may have been damaged but the remedy should be declaring you innocent for a crime you actually did commit.
Like most members of our screwed up judicial system, the truth does not seem to matter to you.
|
You are actually the one confusing the issue here. As I noted above, the rule requires that illegally obtained evidence be excluded from a trial. If the police do their job adequately, the criiminal, if indeed he is guilty, should be convicted on the basis of other, legally obtained evidence. The remedy is not an award to the defendant. The remedy is an assurance to the People that their right to be secure in their homes and property is being protected. Any effect on the defendant is purely collateral.
And that's the truth that matters.
